Urias-Orellana v. Bondi

607 U. S. 537 (2026) · 3/04/26

The Immigration and Nationality Act requires application of the substantial-evidence standard to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ agency’s determination whether a given set of undisputed facts rises to the level of persecution under 8 U. S. C. §1101(a)(42)(A).

This case presents the question whether the courts of appeals must apply substantial-evidence review to the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination whether a given set of undisputed facts constitutes “persecution” under 8 U. S. C. § 1101(a)(42). Petitioners Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, his wife Sayra Iliana Gamez-Mejia, and their minor child G. E. U. G. are natives of El Salvador who entered the United States without authorization in 2021. After being placed in removal proceedings, petitioners applied for asylum. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the U. S. Government…

Held: The INA requires application of the substantial-evidence standard to the agency's determination whether a given set of undisputed facts rises to the level of persecution under § 1101(a)(42)(A). Pp. 543–551. (a) Section 1252(b)(4) sets forth the scope and standard of review for courts of appeals evaluating IJ and BIA removal orders; subparagraph (B) provides that “administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” The Court has previously interpreted this provision to prescribe a deferential,…